Met Fall 2021 Banter.

[ineedsnow]

Anyone know why Tim Kelley left NECN?

[STILL N OF PIKE]

3 hours ago, ineedsnow said:

Anyone know why Tim Kelley left NECN?

Wonder if he moving to Stowe Or Jay for the winter . Seems he’s up there all the time .

[STILL N OF PIKE]

Avis led a 1000 point move in dow transportation index yesterday lifting the index some 15% prior to noon when Avis rose from 190$ to 500$ (in one day) 

 

[Damage In Tolland]

3 hours ago, ineedsnow said:

Anyone know why Tim Kelley left NECN?

Fired 

[tunafish]

4 hours ago, ineedsnow said:

Anyone know why Tim Kelley left NECN?

Going to make an uneducated guess that it was vaccine mandate related.

[dryslot]

20 hours ago, tunafish said:

Voting day.  RIP to the endless CMP Corridor ads.

Yes and goodbye corridor.

[tunafish]

16 minutes ago, dryslot said:

Yes and goodbye corridor.

I guess people really bought into the advertisements.  I could see if I owned property near the new 50 miles I'd be against it.  And CMP can definitely suck it.  But how are we going to move forward with renewable energy if we don't allow them to complete the project?  Contract isn't going away.  IMO Mass using hydro is better than other less sustainable alternatives. 

I think I'm more shocked by voters approving 3, amending the Constitution over a tinfoil hat conspiracy. 

We shot down renewable energy and approved amending the Constitution, doesn't make sense.

[mreaves]

5 hours ago, ineedsnow said:

Anyone know why Tim Kelley left NECN?

 

2 hours ago, STILL N OF PIKE said:

Wonder if he moving to Stowe Or Jay for the winter . Seems he’s up there all the time .

Hmmm, a couple of longtime weather people just retired from the local CBS and NBC affiliates.  The CBS one is all set but maybe the NBC affiliate made him an offer that allowed him to move up?

[DavisStraight]

17 minutes ago, mreaves said:

 

Hmmm, a couple of longtime weather people just retired from the local CBS and NBC affiliates.  The CBS one is all set but maybe the NBC affiliate made him an offer that allowed him to move up?

I read somewhere that he said he was in the wrong place at the wrong time and brought it to social media and he shouldn't have. I don't follow him on any social media, maybe the answer's there.

[CoastalWx]

1 hour ago, tunafish said:

I guess people really bought into the advertisements.  I could see if I owned property near the new 50 miles I'd be against it.  And CMP can definitely suck it.  But how are we going to move forward with renewable energy if we don't allow them to complete the project?  Contract isn't going away.  IMO Mass using hydro is better than other less sustainable alternatives. 

I think I'm more shocked by voters approving 3, amending the Constitution over a tinfoil hat conspiracy. 

We shot down renewable energy and approved amending the Constitution, doesn't make sense.

Was the big deal just clearing a 100’ area of trees to bring it down? What was the big issue outside of that?

[tunafish]

8 minutes ago, CoastalWx said:

Was the big deal just clearing a 100’ area of trees to bring it down? What was the big issue outside of that?

I think that and "Mass profits at Maine's Expense" were the big ones people were drawn too.  And I think the pro-corridor campaign adding in the retroactive law aspect did more harm than good.

The question wording was a mess, too, which didn't help. 

"Do you want to ban the construction of high-impact electric transmission lines in the Upper Kennebec Region and to require the Legislature to approve all other such projects anywhere in Maine, both retroactively to 2020, and to require the Legislature, retroactively to 2014, to approve by a two-thirds vote such projects using public land?"

This article did a good job breaking it all down, unbiased IMO.  

https://www.mainepublic.org/politics/2021-10-22/what-maine-voters-should-know-about-question-1

[dryslot]

The retroactive law selling point was an invalid one anyways, That law already exist on the books in the legislature even before the proposed corridor.

First of all, Maine legislators can already pass retroactive laws and they’ve done so more than 150 times in the past two decades. Doing so requires, in most cases, a majority vote of the Legislature and the governor’s approval, or absent that, enough lawmaker support to override a gubernatorial veto.

[CoastalWx]

26 minutes ago, tunafish said:

I think that and "Mass profits at Maine's Expense" were the big ones people were drawn too.  And I think the pro-corridor campaign adding in the retroactive law aspect did more harm than good.

The question wording was a mess, too, which didn't help. 

"Do you want to ban the construction of high-impact electric transmission lines in the Upper Kennebec Region and to require the Legislature to approve all other such projects anywhere in Maine, both retroactively to 2020, and to require the Legislature, retroactively to 2014, to approve by a two-thirds vote such projects using public land?"

This article did a good job breaking it all down, unbiased IMO.  

https://www.mainepublic.org/politics/2021-10-22/what-maine-voters-should-know-about-question-1

The same people trying to stop it are the ones with cars rotting in the front yard, dumping oil and other shit in the woods or burning it, while riding around in a diesel pick up truck doing rolling coal rallies. Such environmentalists. 

[CoastalWx]

They gonna take your gunz!! 

[CoastalWx]

I get it if you are a person with land there...I completely understand that. But as usual, fear mongering and takes like "MA profits off of ME" are silly. 

[mreaves]

3 minutes ago, CoastalWx said:

The same people trying to stop it are the ones with cars rotting in the front yard, dumping oil and other shit in the woods or burning it, while riding around in a diesel pick up truck doing rolling coal rallies. Such environmentalists. 

The article that Tuna linked seems like a pretty decent explanation of the conflicting views. The Conservation Law Foundation supports the project while the Sierra Club opposes it.  The other thing is not everyone believes Hydro-Quebec is all that environmentally conscious.  They've flooded millions of acres of forest that has released tons of carbon and methane into the atmosphere.  The article points out that a bill was introduced a couple of years ago that would have required an independent assessment of any claimed impacts on climate change that was defeated after heavy lobbying by Central Maine Power.  It's a pretty complex mix of parties opposed to the project. 

[dryslot]

Lol

 

[dryslot]

1 minute ago, mreaves said:

The article that Tuna linked seems like a pretty decent explanation of the conflicting views. The Conservation Law Foundation supports the project while the Sierra Club opposes it.  The other thing is not everyone believes Hydro-Quebec is all that environmentally conscious.  They've flooded millions of acres of forest that has released tons of carbon and methane into the atmosphere.  The article points out that a bill was introduced a couple of years ago that would have required an independent assessment of any claimed impacts on climate change that was defeated after heavy lobbying by Central Maine Power.  It's a pretty complex mix of parties opposed to the project. 

The biggest one of all that's not mentioned is who's pockets were going to be lined in all this, And i won't mention her name.

[tunafish]

20 minutes ago, CoastalWx said:

The same people trying to stop it are the ones with cars rotting in the front yard, dumping oil and other shit in the woods or burning it, while riding around in a diesel pick up truck doing rolling coal rallies. Such environmentalists. 

And oddly enough people who are truly environmentally conscious opposed this, too.  As Eaves pointed out, it was a complex mix opposed to this thing.

That map is interesting dryslot.  Look at Cape Elizabeth as the outlier voting for the corridor.  

[RUNNAWAYICEBERG]

2 hours ago, tunafish said:

I guess people really bought into the advertisements.  I could see if I owned property near the new 50 miles I'd be against it.  And CMP can definitely suck it.  But how are we going to move forward with renewable energy if we don't allow them to complete the project?  Contract isn't going away.  IMO Mass using hydro is better than other less sustainable alternatives. 

I think I'm more shocked by voters approving 3, amending the Constitution over a tinfoil hat conspiracy. 

We shot down renewable energy and approved amending the Constitution, doesn't make sense.

We don’t move forward, we just make it great again.

[dryslot]

19 minutes ago, tunafish said:

And oddly enough people who are truly environmentally conscious opposed this, too.  As Eaves pointed out, it was a complex mix opposed to this thing.

That map is interesting dryslot.  Look at Cape Elizabeth as the outlier voting for the corridor.  

I saw that last night as votes were being tallied on the press heralds site, But the votes were close overall in the cape by the no winning by 107 votes, The other one was frye island once i blew up the map lol

 

[mreaves]

8 minutes ago, RUNNAWAYICEBERG said:

We don’t move forward, we just make it great again.

It isn't that simple though.  Look at the list of people opposing the project, there are some strange bedfellows.  Also, as I mentioned in a previous post,  Hydro-Quebec isn't exactly an innocent, clean energy producer.

Here is a link to the Natural Resources Council of Maine's take on how environmentally friendly Hydro-Quebec is.

https://www.nrcm.org/news/hydro-quebec-offers-misleading-claims-powers-climate-impact/

[CoastalWx]

If you assume that Maine logs 500,000 acres which is what I saw...correct me if I am wrong...145 miles by 150' is a lot less square footage of trees removed. So there is that. Now it does seem like Maine tries to plant trees after logging which is good...but that is a lot of timber removed. 

[dryslot]

Every time there is a storm it would be easier if they logged SE MA and CT.

[CoastalWx]

3 minutes ago, dryslot said:

Every time there is a storm it would be easier if they logged SE MA and CT.

I'll give some oaks up. 

[dryslot]

4 minutes ago, CoastalWx said:

I'll give some oaks up. 

You have the wrong species, Its soft wood they need........lol

[dryslot]

The other dumb referrendum that got defeated, Dendrite would not have been able to raise his chickens here if this passed, And lol at that last line....

Maine voters agree: Food is a basic right

The right to food won rave reviews Tuesday from Maine voters, who passed the nation's first guarantee for people to grow, harvest and eat according to their own wishes.

The Maine ballot measure was one of several in states seeking to create new constitutional rights touching on an array of issues. Some were a response to policies put in place during the coronavirus pandemic, including a pair of Texas proposals limiting restrictions on religious gatherings and nursing home visits.

Maine's unique measure declares individuals have an “unalienable right to grow, raise, harvest, produce and consume the food of their own choosing.” It passed comfortably.

“It’s always a good idea to secure and protect an individual right in the world we live in. Food is life,” said Democratic state Sen. Craig Hickman, a supporter of the proposal. “I don’t understand why anyone would be afraid of saying so out loud in the constitution.”

Opponents had worried the measure might lead some people to try to raise cattle in cities.

[tunafish]

59 minutes ago, dryslot said:

The other dumb referrendum that got defeated, Dendrite would not have been able to raise his chickens here if this passed, And lol at that last line....

Maine voters agree: Food is a basic right

The right to food won rave reviews Tuesday from Maine voters, who passed the nation's first guarantee for people to grow, harvest and eat according to their own wishes.

The Maine ballot measure was one of several in states seeking to create new constitutional rights touching on an array of issues. Some were a response to policies put in place during the coronavirus pandemic, including a pair of Texas proposals limiting restrictions on religious gatherings and nursing home visits.

Maine's unique measure declares individuals have an “unalienable right to grow, raise, harvest, produce and consume the food of their own choosing.” It passed comfortably.

“It’s always a good idea to secure and protect an individual right in the world we live in. Food is life,” said Democratic state Sen. Craig Hickman, a supporter of the proposal. “I don’t understand why anyone would be afraid of saying so out loud in the constitution.”

Opponents had worried the measure might lead some people to try to raise cattle in cities.

I thought this one passed?  Dumb referendum is right, though...

From this article:  https://bangordailynews.com/2021/10/17/homestead/what-you-need-to-know-before-voting-on-maines-right-to-food-referendum-joam40zk0w/

The legislators who wrote the bill have said that they worry in the future that the government might create roadblocks and restrictions on what Mainers can grow. Rep. Billy Bob Faulkingham, R-Winter Harbor, testified earlier this year before the Legislature’s agriculture committee that he is concerned that companies like Monsanto may “own all the seeds” in the future, and gardening may become “a luxury reserved for the rich.”

Making amendments to the state constitution based on something that MIGHT happen in the future is a dangerous move.  Nobody is being denied the right to grow their own food and save seeds right now.

[dryslot]

1 hour ago, tunafish said:

I thought this one passed?  Dumb referendum is right, though...

From this article:  https://bangordailynews.com/2021/10/17/homestead/what-you-need-to-know-before-voting-on-maines-right-to-food-referendum-joam40zk0w/

The legislators who wrote the bill have said that they worry in the future that the government might create roadblocks and restrictions on what Mainers can grow. Rep. Billy Bob Faulkingham, R-Winter Harbor, testified earlier this year before the Legislature’s agriculture committee that he is concerned that companies like Monsanto may “own all the seeds” in the future, and gardening may become “a luxury reserved for the rich.”

Making amendments to the state constitution based on something that MIGHT happen in the future is a dangerous move.  Nobody is being denied the right to grow their own food and save seeds right now.

It did pass, I worded that wrong, I would have been pissed if i wouldn't be able to grow my tomatoes....lol.

[tunafish]

9 minutes ago, dryslot said:

It did pass, I worded that wrong, I would have been pissed if i wouldn't be able to grow my tomatoes....lol.

Ha, that's what's confusing about this.  Were you ever concerned that someone was going to tell you that you can't grow tomatoes?  Or buy seeds for a new variety of tomatoes?  Or save your seeds from last year?

It's a referendum to solve a problem that doesn't exist.